... Evolution will be taught as the mainstream consensus view that
it is, but these standards also will allow healthy discussion and
critical examination of its claims. These standards will serve all of
New Mexico's children well.We are proud to have been part of this
effort and proud of the fact that New Mexico will now have among the
best science standards in the nation. This is a great victory for
excellence in science education, for the integrity of science and for
objectivity in the teaching of biological origins. Most important,
this is a great victory for all New Mexico students, regardless of
their faith or background. ...

This fall, the CENTER FOR RECLAIMING AMERICA teamed with the
Intelligent Design Network, Inc., New Mexico Division (IDnet-NM), to
make an important impact on the way science is taught in New
Mexico.

The states proposed standards, distributed in April 2003,
portrayed evolution as unquestioned fact. From that point forward,
IDnet-NM worked diligently to insure that New Mexico adopted balanced
science standards, with their efforts centered on making sure that
evolution was not presented as the only option to New Mexicos
public school students. By mid-summer, they determined that the most
effective way to emphasize their message was to enlist grassroots
support.

So the CENTER sent a State Alert to our nearly 1,500 New Mexico
E-Army members about this opportunity to make a difference in their
home state.

The results are in . . . the results are good!

Joe Renick, IDnets executive director, reported, A
conservative estimate is that we had some 2,000 letters and e-mails
sent to the ten elected board members. . . . I believe very strongly
that the concern expressed by the public forced a positive response
on the part of the State Department of Education (SDE) and the State
Board of Education that they otherwise may not have made.

A large stack of the letters even made an appearance at an
important committee meeting where it was understood that
evolution would be presented objectively and alternative
theories of biological origins would be permitted.

While much language in the standards was not changed, an important
caveat was added which stated in part, . . . these standards do
not present scientific theory as absolute . . .

Further, for-the-record questions posed by ID-net
confirmed that the SDEs intent for the new standards was that
(1) evolution would not be taught as absolute fact and (2) teachers
would be allowed to discuss problems with evolution.

Renicks final evaluation of the situation: If there is
ever a dispute over intent and meaning of the Standards in the area
of biological evolution, these policy statements may be referenced
for clarification, . . . [and] will essentially neutralize
the impact of the remaining dogmatic language.

[Note: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated
that only two states require critical analysis of Darwinian evolution
in their science standards. In fact, there are three states that do
this. We thank John Calvert for bringing this fact to our
attention.]

SEATTLE, JUNE 8 - Minnesota has become the third state to require
students to know about scientific evidence critical of Darwinian
evolution in its newly adopted science standards. ...
In 2002, Ohio became the first state to require students to learn
about scientific evidence critical of Darwinian theory, adopting a
benchmark that says students should know "how scientists continue to
investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory."
...
New Mexico was the second state to require students to critically
analyze Darwin's theory, adopting a performance standard in 2003 that
asked students to "critically analyze the data and observations
supporting the conclusion that the species living on Earth today are
related by descent from the ancestral one-celled organisms."

... At the state and local level, from South Carolina to
California, these advocates are using lawsuits and school board
debates to counter evolutionary theory. Alabama and Georgia
legislators recently introduced bills to allow teachers to challenge
evolutionary theory in the classroom. Ohio, Minnesota, New Mexico
and Ohio have approved new rules allowing that. And a school
board member in a Tennessee county wants stickers pasted on textbooks
that say evolution remains unproven. ...

Jonathan Wells, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, a
Seattle-based think tank that was created to promote "intelligent
design," a theory of creationism, told reporters that they weren't
proposing that intelligent design be taught but that they hoped
Kansas would adopt science standards similar to those used in Ohio,
Minnesota and New Mexico that include methods for challenging
theories like evolution with the introduction of "new evidence".
...

President Bush's Support for Free Speech on Evolution and
Intelligent Design Draws Praise From Discovery Institute

In a discussion with reporters on Monday, President George W.
Bush supported local control on how evolution is taught but also
expressed support for exposing students to different views about
evolution. ... Discovery Institute opposes mandating the teaching of
intelligent design, but it supports requiring students to know
about scientific criticisms of Darwin's theory, which is the approach
adopted by the science standards in Ohio, Minnesota, New Mexico, and
currently under discussion in Kansas. Discovery Institute also
supports the right of teachers to voluntarily discuss the scientific
debate over intelligent design free from persecution or
intimidation.

President Bush jumped feet-first into the current debate raging in
many states over how evolution should be taught in the nation's
schools, when he said both the evolution and intelligent design
theories should be presented to students. ... The Discovery Institute
says it opposes mandating the teaching of intelligent design, but
supports requiring students to know about scientific criticisms of
Darwin's theory. That approach has been adopted by the science
standards in Ohio, Minnesota, New Mexico and currently is under
discussion in Kansas. ...

A third misunderstanding is that there are widespread efforts to
mandate the teaching of design. In reality, what most states are
considering is not teaching design but teaching the weaknesses as
well as the strengths of modern Darwinian theory. This is the
approach adopted in the science standards of Ohio, Minnesota and New
Mexico. It's also the approach under consideration by the Kansas
State Board of Education ...

SEATTLE - When President Bush plunged into the debate over the
teaching of evolution this month, saying, "both sides ought to be
properly taught," he seemed to be reading from the playbook of the
Discovery Institute, the conservative think tank here that is at the
helm of this newly volatile frontier in the nation's culture wars.
... These successes follow a path laid in a 1999 Discovery manifesto
known as the Wedge Document, which sought 'nothing less than the
overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies' in favor of a
'broadly theistic understanding of nature.' President Bush's
signature education law, known as No Child Left Behind, also helped,
as mandatory testing prompted states to rewrite curriculum standards.
Ohio, New Mexico and Minnesota have embraced the institute's
'teach the controversy' approach; Kansas is expected to follow suit
in the fall. ...

Correction: August 24, 2005, Wednesday A front-page article
on Sunday about the Discovery Institute, which promotes the concept
known as intelligent design to explain the origins of life, referred
incorrectly to the religious affiliation of the institute's fellows.
Most are conservative Christians, including Roman Catholics and
evangelical Protestants -- not fundamentalist Christians.

The article also referred incorrectly to recent changes in science
standards adopted by Ohio, Minnesota and New Mexico. While those
states encourage critical analysis of evolution, they did not
necessarily embrace the institute's ''teach the controversy''
approach. ...

President George W. Bush and Senate majority leader Bill Frist
have recently publicly advocated teaching intelligent design in
science classes. Their endorsement of a discredited, nonscientific
view could signal a huge step backward for scientific education. It
is time for educated, motivated scientists to get involved and to
educate others. ... Why should you bother with all this? Because this
is not a fight for only developmental or anthropological scientists
to fight. We all must be informed and we all must get involved to
make sure that our lay peers know the facts. The science
curriculum is being changed to incorporate intelligent design in
Ohio, New Mexico, Minnesota, Kansas, and Pennsylvania  it
is important to make sure this does not spread to other states, and
that it is overturned in the states where it is taught. One thing is
unambiguous: this sort of discussion  of religion  does
not belong in the classroom. ..."

National groups weren't waiting for the State Board of Education
to vote on new science standards for Kansas' public schools before
weighing in on whether they attack evolution and promote creationism.
... The Kansas board's action is part of an ongoing national debate
over evolution. In Pennsylvania, a trial is underway in a lawsuit
against the Dover school board's policy of requiring high school
students to hear about intelligent design in their biology classes.
In August, President Bush endorsed teaching intelligent design
alongside evolution. The Discovery Institute said Minnesota, New
Mexico, Ohio and Pennsylvania also have standards similar to the ones
proposed for Kansas. Ohio was the first to adopt them, in 2002.
...

The Kansas Board of Education approved new science standards for
teachers in public schools Tuesday that question Charles Darwin's
teachings on evolution and hand a victory to advocates of
"intelligent design." ... School boards in Minnesota, New Mexico
and Ohio have adopted similar standards, and one school district
in Pennsylvania has gone to court to defend its right to challenge
evolution. ...

The Kansas Board of Education voted Tuesday that students will be
expected to study doubts about modern Darwinian theory, a move that
defied the nation's scientific establishment even as it gave voice to
religious conservatives and others who question the theory of
evolution. ... Tuesday's vote makes Kansas the fifth state to adopt
standards that cast doubt on evolution. A trial is now under way in
Pennsylvania over whether teaching "intelligent design"  a
concept that holds life is too complex to have evolved without help
from a higher power  violates the Constitution's ban on state
promotion of religion. Ohio, Minnesota and New Mexico also have
adopted standards that encourage questioning of evolution by local
school districts. ...

... Kansas is the fifth state to adopt a curriculum that
encourages high school students to learn both sides of evolution.
Pennsylvania, Minnesota, New Mexico and Ohio also have adopted
similar standards. ...

... Earlier this month, the Kansas Board of Education approved new
science standards that give school districts the authority to
challenge evolution. School boards in Minnesota, New Mexico and
Ohio have adopted similar standards. ...

... The debate between teaching creationism or evolution is not
new. During the last few years, however, it has been refueled by
intelligent design. In May, the Kansas State Board of Education held
a hearing on teaching evolution. Three states  Ohio, New
Mexico and Minnesota  have adopted standards that could allow
intelligent design to be taught in schools. ...

The South Carolina Education Oversight Committee will hear
testimony from two scientists today who will advise them to recommend
language for the states science standards that calls for
students to critically analyze certain aspects of evolutionary
theory. ...Five other states, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kansas, New
Mexico, and Minnesota, have adopted science standards that require
learning about some of the scientific controversies relating to
evolution. ...

... Although Pennsylvania, New Mexico, Minnesota and Kansas
also feature sharp criticism of evolution, Ohio has been in the
vanguard of the fight over how evolution is taught in public schools
and is closely watched by other states. ...

... A proposal to teach intelligent design alongside evolution was
rejected. Instead, the board in December 2002 unanimously adopted
standards requiring that 10th graders be able to "describe how
scientists continue to investigate and critically analyze aspects of
evolutionary theory," with a parenthetical note that "this benchmark
does not mandate the teaching or testing of intelligent design."
Since then, New Mexico, Minnesota and Kansas have adopted similar
standards, and Pennsylvania lists evolution among half a dozen
theories to be critically analyzed. But only Ohio has a model lesson
plan ...

... Hovis and others who support teaching evolution alone
predicted that Ohio's decision would affect science standards in
several other states. New Mexico, Minnesota and Kansas also
require students to learn criticisms of evolution; South Carolina
and Michigan are considering a similar measure. ...

... The Discovery Institute had touted Ohio as a national model
for its "teach the controversy" approach to evolution, which it hoped
would focus on questioning Darwin's theory. To date, Kansas,
Minnesota, New Mexico and Pennsylvania have adopted similar "critical
analysis" standards, and the South Carolina Board of Education is
slated to vote next month about whether to add similar wording to its
curriculum guidelines, according to the Times. ...

... Ohio's curriculum has stood without legal challenge for three
years, as have similar standards in Kansas, New Mexico, Minnesota,
and a handful of other individual districts. The difference from
Dover: The critical analysis approach to evolution does not teach ID.
...

The Rio Rancho school board voted Monday to amend a controversial
science policy, which opponents said was a ruse to insert intelligent
design into the science classroom. The board removed a sentence from
the policy that deviated from state standards, and replaced it with
language taken verbatim from the standards. ... Scharfglass said
after the meeting that although the amended policy just restates
exactly what state standards say, it is necessary to make sure the
standards are being enforced in class. That standard is that
students be allowed to discuss alternative ideas to evolutionary
theory. ...

Q&A About South Carolina Science Standards and Critical
Analysis of Evolution

Posted by Robert Crowther

On June 12, 2006, South Carolina will likely become the fifth
state to adopt science standards requiring critical analysis of
evolution. Four other states whose science standards require full
disclosure of the scientific evidence about evolution include New
Mexico, Minnesota, Kansas, and Pennsylvania. Previously Ohio also
had standards calling for critical analysis of evolution. ...

Microbiologist Testifies in Favor of Critical Analysis by Casey
Luskin

... It would be great to see Michigan join the ranks of Kansas,
New Mexico, Minnesota, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania as states
that presently have science standards requiring critical analysis of
evolution. ...

Calvary Chapel Pastor Plans Series to Teach His Congregation About
Creationism

By Patrick Dunn, For the Journal

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? This may be a question
for everyone from philosophers to grade schoolers, but to Pastor
Robert Hall of Calvary Rio Rancho, the real issue is where the
chicken and the egg came from. He is presenting his answer from a
Christian worldview perspective with an eight-week series on
creation. The creationism-evolution controversy has been a polarizing
issue nationally. 'The debate for intelligent design is raging across
our country,' Hall said. The controversy recently hit home with the
Rio Rancho school board's adoption of a policy that would allow for
the discussion of alternative ideas to evolution in science class.
Eventually, controversial language was removed from the policy.
The amended policy restates the state standard that students
be allowed to discuss alternative ideas to evolutionary theory.
..."

Recently, the state of South Carolina joined Minnesota,
Pennsylvania, Kansas and New Mexico by approving statewide science
standards which require a critical analysis of evolution in science
classrooms. In these five states the standard-issue Darwinian
evolution will still be taught, but with an interesting twist which
ought to raise some eyebrows - the scientific WEAKNESSES of Darwinian
theory will ALSO be disclosed. ...

According to Crowther, Kansass approach to teaching
evolution will better inform students about the facts of the
scientific evidence in biology, and also require them to critically
analyze the evidence so they will gain the critical thinking skills
necessary to become good scientists. Four other states
Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and South Carolina
have standards requiring students to learn about critical analysis of
evolution already in place. Scientists continue to raise
questions about evolutionary theory, and in recent years a growing
number of scientists have raised significant issues challenging
various aspects of biological and chemical evolution.

... Robert Crowther, director of communications for Discovery
Institute, said Kansas approach to teaching evolution will
better inform students about the facts of scientific evidence in
biology and will require them to critically analyze that evidence so
that they will gain the critical thinking skills necessary to become
good scientists. Besides Kansas, four other states -- Minnesota,
New Mexico, Pennsylvania and South Carolina -- have science standards
that require students to learn about critical analysis of evolution,
Discovery noted in a July 7 news release. ...

"Whats the Matter with Kansas? Dishonest Darwinists 
coming to a state near you." By David Klinghoffer

Will Darwinism be taught as unquestionable dogma? Thats the
question that voters decided. In Kansas, it seems it will. Kansas
has been one of five states with biology curricula that include
instruction about the evidence both for and against neo-Darwinism,
requiring that students learn about the critical analysis
of evolutionary theory. Darwin advocates worked hard to defeat
the majority on the education board and eliminate this
requirement.

“The Theory of Intelligent Design: A briefing packet for educators, to help teachers understand the debate between Darwinian evolution and intelligent design”

On Page 12 of 24:
"Five states (Kansas, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, South Carolina,
and Minnesota) have already adopted science standards that
require learning about some of the scientific controversies relating
to evolution."

And this, on page 13 of 24:
"Four states (Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and South
Carolina) have science standards that require learning about
some of the scientific controversies relating to evolution."

Quote from State Board of Education member Flora Sanchez , made
during the hearing on the adoption of the standards (August 28,
2003). As reported by Diana Heil of the Santa Fe New Mexican on
August 29, 2003,"Board member Flora Sanchez put a stop to mixed
messages, though. She clarified this point: The state is not asking
teachers to present all the alternatives to evolution and 'put them
on an equal footing.'..."
(This is on-line here,
and even on the ARN site.)

... Take the situation in New Mexico, one of the most interesting
successes evolution's backers have had in striking back against
creationists. After the state Board of Education slipped
pro-creationism language into the curriculum standards in 1996,
physicist Marshall Berman of Sandia National Laboratories ran for a
position on the school board himself. Helped in part by the
endorsements of New Mexico's admittedly high percentage of prominent
scientists, Berman won a seat in 1998 and within about a year had
changed the school standards back.

Berman also says he cultivated a strategy an increasing number of
science groups are now taking up -- reaching out to moderates and
religious leaders who are willing to accept evolution. "I think the
appropriate approach is to make it very clear that this is not a
struggle between religion and atheism," Berman says. "After people
realized I didn't have horns and was not a monster ... we returned
modern biology and geology to the curriculum." Like Krebs, Berman
also believes that "evolution is just a wedge -- the beginning of an
attempt to do away with the separation of church and state in this
country." Thus he thinks a crucial part of forming a solid
pro-evolution coalition is recruiting religious leaders who still
appreciate that separation.

Challengers of evolution lose by Lisa Anderson, Tribune national
correspondent

This story contains corrected material, published Feb. 22,
2006.

... Although science standards in Pennsylvania, New Mexico,
Minnesota and Kansas encourage critical analysis of evolution in
the traditional sense of scientific inquiry, Ohio has been in the
vanguard of the fight over how evolution is taught in public schools
and is closely watched by other states (this sentence as published
has been corrected in this text). ...